Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] kernel/signal: Signal-based pre-coredump notification

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 11/29, Dave Martin wrote:
>
> SIGCHLD + wait() is immune to this problem for other child status
> notifications (albeit with higher overhead).
>
> Unless I've missed something fundamental, signals simply aren't a
> reliable data transport

Yes. But I hope we are not going to implement WCOREDUMP.

I am not fan of this patch, but at least it is simple.

Oleg.




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Newbies]     [x86 Platform Driver]     [Netdev]     [Linux Wireless]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux Filesystems]     [Yosemite Discussion]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux